Paper detail

Pseudo and Strongly Pseudo 2--Factor Isomorphic Regular Graphs

A graph $G$ is pseudo 2--factor isomorphic if the parity of the number of cycles in a 2--factor is the same for all 2--factors of $G$. In \cite{ADJLS} we proved that pseudo 2--factor isomorphic $k$--regular bipartite graphs exist only for $k \le 3$. In this paper we generalize this result for regular graphs which are not necessarily bipartite. We also introduce strongly pseudo 2--factor isomorphic graphs and we prove that pseudo and strongly pseudo 2--factor isomorphic 2k--regular graphs and $k$--regular digraphs do not exist for $k\geq 4$. Moreover, we present constructions of infinite families of regular graphs in these classes. In particular we show that the family of Flower snarks is strongly pseudo 2--factor isomorphic but not 2--factor isomorphic and we conjecture that, together with the Petersen and the Blanuša2 graphs, they are the only cyclically 4--edge--connected snarks for which each 2--factor contains only cycles of odd length.

preprint2010arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.